Kofi Annan is a piece of shit.

[EvilMonkey]

He says "all...communities".  The (Iraqi) insurgents aren't a "community" unto themselves, they are rogue members of particular communities.  What he's basically saying is that Sunnis, Kurds, Shia, women, etc must all have a voice and believe in their own importance.  Which is just the same detailless drivel we've heard for the past year, but it's not an argument for a special Department of Terrorist Affairs in the new government.

 

Jackie, I hear ya, and I truly believe that. I believe he didn't mean to include terrorists inhis planning. But he is a man that is careful with his words, more so that someone like Rove. Yet, those of a more liberal bent here seem to think that what Rove says it what he means to the letter, no room for 'what he meant'. However, WHATEVER Kofi meant, he is still a piece of s***.

[jackie hayes]

Jackie, I hear ya, and I truly believe that.  I believe he didn't mean to include terrorists inhis planning.  But he is a man that is careful with his words, more so that someone like Rove.  Yet, those of a more liberal bent here seem to think that what Rove says it what he means to the letter, no room for 'what he meant'.  However, WHATEVER Kofi meant, he is still a piece of s***.

Well, on Iraq, I'm of a more liberal bent. And I meant that we've heard that sort of useless pontificating from the US as well as the UN. 'We have to get everyone involved.' Okay, how? 'Oh, we're working really really hard on that, it's nuanced, very very nuanced.'

 

But the point is Annan did say "communities", it's not just something he "means". And anyway, even if he had said 'get everyone involved', how picky do you want to be? This is like calling Abraham Lincoln a piece of s*** for the Gettysburg address. "Government of the people, by the people, for the people? -- All the people? So you think serial hatchet murderers should be involved in the government, you pos, since you didn't exclude anyone."

[Texsox]

Didn't we have to attack Iraq because they broke UN Resolutions?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Didn't we have to attack Iraq because they broke UN Resolutions?

 

 

Yeah, and its really sad that the U.N. is so toothless that it can't, or won't, enforce its own regulations.

[Texsox]

Yeah,  and its really sad that the U.N. is so toothless that it can't, or won't,  enforce its own regulations.

 

Told Iraq no WMD

We didn't believe the UN inspectors

1,800 dead Americans later, do we believe?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Told Iraq no WMD

We didn't believe the UN inspectors

1,800 dead Americans later, do we believe?

 

 

Just as soon as your side believes that it was Kofi Annan's corruption and hypocrasy and that of his predecessor that allowed Hussein to be propped up for so long in the first place.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Just as soon as your side believes that it was Kofi Annan's corruption and hypocrasy and that of his predecessor that allowed Hussein to be propped up for so long in the first place.

And before him, Reagan and Rumsfeld (not to mention US multinationals) Plus the US knew about many of the illicit oil sales -- so if they wanted to do something about that they could have.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

 

Documents obtained by CNN reveal the United States knew about, and even condoned, embargo-breaking oil sales by Saddam Hussein's regime, and did so to shore up alliances with Iraq's neighbors.

 

The oil trade with countries such as Turkey and Jordan appears to have been an open secret inside the U.S. government and the United Nations for years.

 

The unclassified State Department documents sent to congressional committees with oversight of U.S. foreign policy divulge that the United States deemed such sales to be in the "national interest," even though they generated billions of dollars in unmonitored revenue for Saddam's regime.

[KipWellsFan]

The Senate committee assigned to investigate the scandal has also concluded that

 

"The United States (government) was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_for_food

 

The neocons are only interested in freedom and democracy when it benefits them geopolitcally, everything else is rhetoric. Their alliance with Uzbekistan is an example.

 

Uzbekistan is nominally democratic but has been described as a police state. Several prominent opponents of the government have fled, and others have been arrested.

 

...

 

As Britain's ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, repeatedly spoke out against human rights abuse by the Karimov regime, most famously the case of Muzafar Avazov, believed to have been boiled alive by the Uzbek security forces.

 

tons more at link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbekistan

[Texsox]

Just as soon as your side believes that it was Kofi Annan's corruption and hypocrasy and that of his predecessor that allowed Hussein to be propped up for so long in the first place.

 

I'm on the "side" of American, what side are you one?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

And before him, Reagan and Rumsfeld (not to mention US multinationals)  Plus the US knew about many of the illicit oil sales -- so if they wanted to do something about that they could have.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

 

Documents obtained by CNN reveal the United States knew about, and even condoned, embargo-breaking oil sales by Saddam Hussein's regime, and did so to shore up alliances with Iraq's neighbors.

 

The oil trade with countries such as Turkey and Jordan appears to have been an open secret inside the U.S. government and the United Nations for years.

 

The unclassified State Department documents sent to congressional committees with oversight of U.S. foreign policy divulge that the United States deemed such sales to be in the "national interest," even though they generated billions of dollars in unmonitored revenue for Saddam's regime.

 

Tell me how oil sales during the Reagan Administration were illicit when the sanctions weren't placed on Iraq until 1990? Your timeline is a little off.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Tell me how oil sales during the Reagan Administration were illicit when the sanctions weren't placed on Iraq until 1990?  Your timeline is a little off.

I'm talking about Reagan's selling of WMD to Saddam which propped him up esp. in the war with Iran (despite Hussein's harboring of Abu Nidal)

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I'm talking about Reagan's selling of WMD to Saddam which propped him up esp. in the war with Iran (despite Hussein's harboring of Abu Nidal)

 

 

We had a lot more to fear from Iran then. They did, as I'm sure you're aware, sieze soverign U.S. proprety and take several dozen of our citizens hostage. It was in our interest to not have them win the war with Iraq.

[southsider2k5]

And before him, Reagan and Rumsfeld (not to mention US multinationals)  Plus the US knew about many of the illicit oil sales -- so if they wanted to do something about that they could have.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

 

Documents obtained by CNN reveal the United States knew about, and even condoned, embargo-breaking oil sales by Saddam Hussein's regime, and did so to shore up alliances with Iraq's neighbors.

 

The oil trade with countries such as Turkey and Jordan appears to have been an open secret inside the U.S. government and the United Nations for years.

 

The unclassified State Department documents sent to congressional committees with oversight of U.S. foreign policy divulge that the United States deemed such sales to be in the "national interest," even though they generated billions of dollars in unmonitored revenue for Saddam's regime.

 

Which is the only country to procecute people for their involvement in the illegal sales to Saddam?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Which is the only country to procecute people for their involvement in the illegal sales to Saddam?

 

 

France.

 

 

Russia.